WILMINGTON, N.C – Former New Hanover County prosecutor James Jay Stroud is “delusional” for still defending his “frame-up” of the Wilmington Ten 40 years ago, says Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr., the leader of the group.

Referring to Stroud’s recent remarks in a local newspaper interview last week, Chavis told The Wilmington Journal: “Stroud’s latest admissions of his zeal to unjustly convict us is just another fact why the Wilmington Ten should be granted a pardon of innocence by Gov. Perdue. Stroud is still delusional 40 years later about basic fairness and equality under the law. I pray that Stroud will one day find it in his heart to repent for the wrong that he has done with respect to the Wilmington Ten.”

Chavis was reacting to Stroud’s remarks confirming for the first time that recently discovered handwritten trial notes documenting the former prosecutor’s attempt to Pick White racists and malleable Blacks for Wilmington Ten jury were indeed his.

In a Nov. 28 Wilmington StarNews interview reportedly conducted in October, but published online only after the North Carolan NAACP’s Nov. 27 press conference in Raleigh calling on Gov. Perdue to pardon the Wilmington Ten, Stroud was reportedly shown copies of his handwritten notes from the June 1972 trial by a reporter, and confirmed their authenticity.

During jury selection for the June 1972 trial of the 10 activists charged with conspiracy in the firebombing of a White-owned grocery store during racial violence a year earlier, Stroud wrote “stay away from black men,” sought only “Uncle Tom type” Black jurors, and numerously wrote “KKK…OK” next to the names of several prospective White jurors.

But the former prosecutor denied that racism, as the North Carolina NAACP maintains, played any role in his jury selection. The “KKK…good” reference Stroud wrote in variations next to several white potential jurors’ names on the legal pad, for example, “…was a strike against the juror because of the potential of a hung jury,” Stroud said.

“I could have had an all-white jury, but I didn’t want to do that,” Stroud told The StarNews. “Why would I leave a KKK on the jury?”

Chavis said, “Facts are facts, and it is an irrefutable fact that all the members of the Wilmington Ten were completely innocent in 1972 of the racially-motivated framed-up charges filed against us by prosecutor Jay Stroud. It is a fact that the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals overturned our unjust convictions on December 4, 1980. Today in 2012, we, the Wilmington Ten, are still innocent of Stroud’s unjust and illegal fabrication.”

Stroud’s negative ratings for potential jurors were unmistakable. Next to several on his list, especially if they had a “B” for blacks written in front of their names or numbers, Stroud wrote, “Leave off” or “stay away from,” but never “good” as he did for the “KKK” jurors he wanted impaneled.

Stroud further told the StarNews that he wanted “conservative blacks” on the jury, later specifying that “Uncle Tom-type” means, “blacks that could be fair.”

Because a jury of 10 Blacks and two Whites was finally impaneled during the June 1972 trial, Stroud, citing “illness,” forced a mistrial to get a jury and judge more to his favor, the state NAACP says. His own handwritten notes on the back of a legal pad, weighing the advantages and disadvantages of a mistrial, betrayed his intent, the civil rights organization says.

A reporter for the StarNews said Stroud was asked about his mistrial notes, and while he didn’t deny he did write them, he also claimed that he really did get sick, so the paper never printed his answer.

Even now, if Stroud admitted that he forced a mistrial in the June 1972 proceedings because he didn’t like the mostly Black jury, he could be charged with a crime, legal experts say.

It was in the second trial in September that year –with a jury this time of 10 Whites and two Blacks – that the nine African-American males, led by civil rights activist Rev. Benjamin Chavis, and one White female, were falsely convicted. They were all sentenced to 282 years in prison, some of which they served, before they were released from prison early after immense public pressure.

In the StarNews article, former prosecutor Stroud still maintained that despite a federal appellate court’s 1980 ruling – which not only overturned all of the Wilmington Ten’s convictions, but also cited him specifically for gross prosecutorial misconduct – the Wilmington Ten were guilty, and deserved to go to prison.

“They got more than a fair deal as far as I’m concerned,” Stroud was quoted as telling the Wilmington newspaper. “I think they should have had to serve their sentences like any other convicted felon.”

Ironically in that same StarNews article where Stroud is convinced that the Wilmington Ten couldn’t have possibly been anything but guilty, he adamantly agreed that prosecutorial frame-ups do exist – against him.

When asked about his 12 convictions over the past six years, mostly in Gaston County, N.C. for charges ranging from domestic violence to repeatedly ramming cars because, the former prosecutor told a judge, “Satan was with [the drivers],” Stroud, who lost his license to practice law in 2008 replied, “I am not guilty of any of the charges that were leveled against me as stated in the warrants. All of the charges were false and fabricated.”

Jay Stroud did serve time in jail for several of those charges. He told the Gaston Gazette that he’s suffered from a bipolar disorder since his time in college.

Attorney Irving Joyner, who, along with James Ferguson, the lead defense attorney 40 years ago for the Wilmington Ten, filed the pardon petition papers last May requesting that Gov. Beverly Perdue grant pardons of actual innocence to each member of the Wilmington Ten, was outraged by Stroud’s remarks.

“We have never presented any information regarding the Wilmington Ten case which has not been fully vetted and determined to be absolutely accurate,” Joyner, a law professor at the North Carolina Central University School of Law in Durham, told The Wilmington Journal.

“Jay Stroud did no more than acknowledge the obvious with respect to his authorship of the racially-inspired efforts to prevent African-Americans from serving on the Wilmington Ten jury. In the same handwriting, he also described his successful effort to fake an illness, misrepresent his medical condition to the court, and to deliberately perpetrate a fraud in Court, a criminal offense,” Joyner continued.

“The comments and notes, which Stroud made, speak for themselves, and further support the obvious conclusion that the persecution of the Wilmington Ten was racially inspired and constitutionally deficient.

“It is now up to the governor of North Carolina to determine whether she is going to correct an injustice, or stand on the side of a racist and illegal persecution in the name of the state of North Carolina.”

At the North Carolina NAACP’s Nov. 27 press conference, veteran civil rights attorney Al McSurely told reporters the trial tactics Stroud used against the Wilmington Ten were illegal, and that the State Bureau of Investigation should look into the matter, and then put the former prosecutor in jail.

North Carolina President Rev. William Barber, who blasted Stroud at the press conference for his “unconstitutional” and “racist” tactics to “frame” the Wilmington Ten, found his StarNews comments justification for further condemnation.

“The more we learn the truths about how race polluted and poisoned the unjust, unconstitutional and unethical prosecutorial acts utilized on this case by Stroud, to frame and falsely convict these young people, the more disturbing they are,” Rev. Barber exclusively told The Wilmington Journal.

“We have a crooked prosecutor who fostered a crooked persecution of innocent individuals, who now wants to admit on one hand his actions, and then on the other hand engage in a distressing revisionist rationale as to why he did what he did. North Carolina must see all of these facts for what they are and represent – calculated and sinister racism used in our court system.”

Rev. Barber added, “Only a pardon can begin to cleanse the depth of wrong being further revealed.”

Add comment

By using our comment system, you agree to not post profane, vulgar, offensive, or slanderous comments. Spam and soliciting are strictly prohibited. Violation of these rules will result in your comments being deleted and your IP Address banned from accessing our website in the future. Your e-mail address will NOT be published, sold or used for marketing purposes.

Comments

Perry I assure you I do not need anyone to tell me I am a good son. No reason to put family issues on blast for everyone to see. I know I am a good son. Read through a bunch of articles,. Not once will I defend his notes on the Wilmington 10. It was before I was born. Just because I am a white man, living in Wilmington, doesn't mean I think they are guilty because they were black. You might not believe it, I was not raised like that. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Those carry no color and no sexual orientation.

Wow, those are some big words. I'll just comment off of what I think they are. I'm not trying to hide what my dad did, or appears to have done. He is his own man. All of this happened before I was even born. The notes my dad made are 100% inappropriate. No place for them in society, let along a court room. The Wilmington 10 being guilty or innocent are not my concern. If they are truly innocent, I PRAY they get the pardon. If they did do it, I don't want them to get a pardon. I've looked at about 1000 different articles on this, just to see what is being said. It involved my dad so of course I'm curious as to what will happen. When someone who has a shady past, I won't say guilty of W 10 now, Is also fired from the NAACP for paying off a sexual harassment charges decides to call my dad delusional. Now I have a problem. Lot of people with mental problems are delusional. So that is my concern. A "leader" a "reverend" are ti be looked up to, not as a comedian calling names

Mr. Stroud's comments are ad hominem attacks designed to shift the focus away from his father's egregious misconduct in the case of the Wilmington 10. Jay Stroud fabricated testimony, bribed witnesses, and withheld exculpatory evidence, serious crimes for which he deserved to be punished. Kirk Stroud's defense of his father is not admirable, it is pathetic. The prosecutor deliberately and with malice aforethought set out to ruin the lives of ten innocent people and lock them up for a crime they did not commit. There is no way to make whole the defendants he so wrongly convicted, but acknowledging the truth would at least be a good start towards righting a terrible injustice. Defending his father now does not make Kirk Stroud a good son; it signals, instead, a twisted, desperate desire to perpetuate a repellent lie. It's time for him to face the truth about his father and start his own healing process, because apparently the damage his father inflicted was not limited to the defendants.

Ben Chavis you have a shady past. Accused of Wilmington 10 fire bombings. Fired from the NAACP for sexual harassment and paying this person off with money that was not yours. So cover up and embezzlement. Shows sign of being a shady person at best. Shady is a compliment at this point. I would still love to hear why someone who is a Reverend refer to anyone as delusional. Yet alone one with a history of mental issues. Why not just call a child with special needs a retard. Chavis was/is a reverend. Then changed his name to Muhhamad (sp) at some point when he became muslim. Then changed his name back. How shady is this person? But if that is brought up it becomes someone being racist against him. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck. Chavis is a criminal. Let's see what crime he commits next, then either changes his name or takes some of his pardon money to pay them "hush money." God will have the final judgement. How comfortable are you with that Ben

There are so many false statements in this. There are also a lot of facts left out. Rev. Chavis weren't you fired from the NAACP for paying off someone? Or is that not going to be brought up? I KIRK STROUD, the son of Jay Stroud, find it embarrassing that someone once called, maybe still is, a Rev. refer to a man as delusional. Especially a man with a history of a mental illness. Or is that just a tall tale? Yep, about 16 years ago, when I GRADUATED COLLEGE NOT HIM, he thought to himself, you know I'm going to fake an illness. I'm going to fool Dr's and hospitals for years, spend time in Central Prison, lose my practice, become homeless all to prove notes that nobody has "released yet" to be written by a man with a mental illness. Sounds reasonable to me. Now, weren't you fired from the NAACP? Let's tell the whole story right??????

I'm going to fool Dr's and hospitals for years, spend time in Central Prison, lose my practice, become homeless all to prove notes that nobody has "released yet" to be written by a man with a mental illness. So the prosecuting attorney was "crazy" . So is that the defense of most racist, for their actions, I thought it was all based on money and power, which has been known to ruin nations, if so I knew it! They are all insane and that's a shame. OMG